MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242189265 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.690

A feasibility trial of a cognitive-behavioural symptom management program for chronic pelvic pain for men with refractory chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

2013· article· en· W4242189265 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dean A. Tripp, J. Curtis Nickel, Laura Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicinePain catastrophizingPhysical therapyProstatitisPelvic painQuality of life (healthcare)MoodChronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndromeInterstitial cystitisChronic painRating scaleInternal medicineUrinary systemClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Our objective was to determine the feasibility of acognitive behavioural symptom management program for the acuteimprovement of psychosocial risk factors of diminished quality oflife (QoL) in men suffering from chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvicpain syndrome (CP/CPPS).Materials and Methods: We assessed CP/CPPS symptoms andimpact (i.e., chronic prostatitis symptom index [CPSI] pain, urinary,QoL domains), psychosocial risk factors were assessed at baselineand weekly for 8 weeks. We included the following psychosocialrisk factors: catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale, PCS),mood (Center for Epidemiological Studies in Depression Scale,CES-D), social support (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived SocialSupport, MSPSS) and general pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire).Patient sessions dispute and replace pessimistic thinking withhealth-focused thinking and behaviour.Results: Eleven men completed the psychosocial management program(mean age = 51.3, standard deviaton [SD] = 12.49). MeanCPSI baseline total score was 25.2 (SD = 10.21). Repeated measuresANOVAs showed the program was associated with significantlinear reductions for pain (p = 0.051), disability (p= 0.020)and catastrophizing (p = 0.005), but no changes in depressivesymptoms or social support. The CPSI baseline scores comparedto follow-up scores (n = 8) were significantly reduced (p = 0.007),with CPSI pain (p = 0.015) and QoL impact (p = 0.013) reduced,but not for urinary scores. Correlations between change scores atthe baseline and at 8 weeks for CPSI and psychosocial risk factorsindicated that reductions in catastrophizing were most stronglyassociated with score reductions for the CPSI; these reductions,however, were not significant.Conclusions: The psychosocial management program targets andsignificantly reduces several empirically supported psychosocialrisk factors associated with poorer CP/CPPS outcomes. Psychosocialmanagement for CP/CPPS is feasible, but requires a randomizedcontrolled trial with longitudinal follow-up.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207